As I do scholarly work in South and East Asian traditions, I’ll throw in my cent and a half. Just for fun for those who may be interested. 

Buddhism spread very quickly westward from the 3rd century BCE onward, with political patrons, monastic institutions and syncretic artwork penetrating into regions between modern Afghanistan, Pakistan and northwest India over the course of two centuries.  In the sixth book of Caesar’s Gallic Wars, there is an interesting comparison between gods belonging to the Vedic and Roman pantheons.  There are even Buddhist grave sites that are traceable to the later Ptolemaic Period, which ended in about 30 BCE, in Alexandria, Egypt.  A South Indian king named Pandya sent a Buddhist mission to Rome in 13 CE, which delivered a letter in Greek to Augustus, and one of whose members presumably immolated himself in Athens, which brought some attention from writers like Strabo.  The figure of the Buddha was known to some third to fourth century Church fathers.  One of them, Cyril of Jerusalem, mentions in his writings a religious teacher from Alexandria, Egypt named Scythianus, who, according to him, traveled to India at around 50 CE.  One of Scythianus’ disciples, Terebinthus, is said by Cyril to have preached about Buddhism in Palestine and Judea sometime in the late first and early second centuries CE before settling in Babylon.  This figure, Terebinthus, is attested to be one other 4th century and a later 10th century text, but in those, Buddhist teaching is associated closely with Mani, and all three attestations seem to be complaining about Manichean ideas, so it is hard to be historically confident about much of this.

One of the difficulties of the early historical presence of Buddhism in the Greco-Roman world between the 2nd century BCE and the 4th century CE is that, despite the fact that we know at least a few Buddhists were in the regions of these realms, we don’t have much in the way of what kinds of intellectual or religious ideas were shared among these traditions, and what directions those ideas flowed in.  The only real textual exception to this rule may lie with King Menander, a North Indian Into-Greek monarch of the second century BCE who finds his way into a major early Buddhist philosophical dialogue called the Questions of King Milinda (Menander).  But apart from that, conceptually, we don’t have much.

Despite all these most intriguing connections, there is no evidence, and thus no reason to believe, that Jesus of Nazareth, whose mission was mostly conducted in lower Galilee and a bit in Jerusalem among predominantly Jewish communities, came into contact with any South Asian ideas or figures.  The early writings of Christians, at least in the documents that made it into the New Testament and which constitute the corpus of the Apostolic Fathers, do not betray any familiarity with ideas or figures from South Asia before the third century.  In a very general sense, the case might be a bit more murky with early Gnostic Christian communities or texts, but even here, we are talking about texts from the 2nd to 4th centuries. So, in terms of Jesus of Nazareth, as a historical matter, I think we can safely rule out any Asian influences on his life or thought.

The larger question about whether Jesus was “enlightened,” provided that being “enlightened” means different things in different traditions, may be a larger philosophical question, rather than a merely historical question.